GUILDERLAND — Despite opposition by town residents, the planning board here last week approved the preliminary plat for the Woodsfield Estates development on East Lydius Street.

The proposed subdivision would place 46 clustered lots on 107 acres that were once slated by the Albany Pine Bush Commission as needing full protection. The planning board accepted a statement of findings as part of its New York State Environmental Quality Review Act. The board found that adverse effects would be avoided or minimized on the plan.
"I do believe it was well-written. It covered everything that needed to be covered," said board member James Cohen.

Joe Bianchine, of ABD Engineers and Surveyors, represented applicant Traditional Builders. Bianchine said that one cul-de-sac on an earlier plan had been replaced by two keyhole lots.

About 80 contiguous acres will remain open space. Stormwater will recharge back into the ground from a retention basin, Bianchine said. A buffer of 100 feet of woods will be maintained, he said. He said that the developer will also install six-foot-wide sidewalks, at the request of town engineer Boswell Engineering.

A phase III archeological study will recover remains of a charcoal pit dating back 400 years, Bianchine said. A second archeological site will not be disturbed in the undeveloped parcel, he said.

Resident Andrew Brocci of Traber Road asked why this subdivision would be allowed when other nearby developments remain unfinished in a slumping housing market. He said that recently three deer approached his yard.
"I won’t have that again. There’s got to be an environmental impact. There’s wildlife. When will the building stop"" Brocci asked.
"I don’t have the right to tell them that," Chairman Stephen Feeney said.
"It was the same thing for your house. Wildlife was there," board member Michael Cleary said.

Brocci said that some of the construction had taken place on Pine Bush lands.
"There’s never been building on Pine Bush Preserve" lands, Feeney said. "To build on parklands would take an act of the state legislature."

Resident and sometime activist Carol Williams said that the proposal, while generally good, should be denied.
"It’s in the wrong place," Williams said. "This area is recommended for full protection."
She said that town, county, and state officials should meet with the developer to "save the area’s fragile ecosystem." She said that amphibians, which can be indicative of environmental health, do not relocate like larger mobile animals.
"This project will have a cumulative negative impact on the Hungerkill," Williams said of a nearby creek. "Leave it undeveloped."
"We’ve been in discussion with the conservancy," Feeney said. "Eighty-two acres of property gets added to the conservancy at no cost to the public. Money can be used elsewhere. This is about as strict a development as you could see anywhere.
"We work pretty hard in the town to preserve...contiguous open space. People have a right to develop their property. We tried to get the best development for the town. I think we achieved that. [The town] actually owns one of the lots in the subdivision," Feeney said.
"I think we have done the best we can in this situation," Cohen said.

Board member Lindsay Childs commended the developer for including the sidewalks, which will connect the Lone Pine 7 subdivision to De Caprio Park.
"Pretty much anything we asked, they were willing to provide," Feeney said.

Landlocked

The board continued an application by David Chainyk to subdivide nine acres on Vaughn Drive into two lots.
"The whole thing’s landlocked," Feeney said. "I thought there was frontage. There is no frontage."

An informal trail runs through Chainyk’s property to a small Bethlehem park.
"It doesn’t affect my property at all," Chainyk said.

Feeney suggested that Chainyk could maintain access to the park in lieu of a recreation fee for new homes built in the town.
"When I lived over there, I used to walk over there to the park," Feeney said.
"So does everybody," Chainyk said.

The property has an existing right-of-way and a perpetual easement with the nearby power company, from which Chainyk’s grandfather purchased part of the property, Chainyk said.

The board and Chainyk determined that all 40 feet of the frontage on the plan were due to an easement.
"We’re going to have to have a true surveyed map," town planner Jan Weston said.
Planning Board Attorney Linda Clark said that town regulations describe an acceptable easement as "existing...as opposed to an acquired one. An easement is loosely a common right of way."

She also said that the property could have been designed to be a landlocked piece.
"It’s a unique situation," Feeney said.
"We would deny a keyhole request if access was by easement," Clark said.

Other business

In other business, the planning board:

— Approved an application by Joe Cataldo to subdivide 2.9 acres on Johnston Road into two lots; and

— Approved a concept proposal for a two-lot subdivision of 11 acres by Dilip and Anna Das, who want to build a home on two of their 11 acres at 6030 Nott Road. The parcels are in a floodplain and require five to six feet of fill.

Weston twice said that she did not recommend building in a floodplain. She told the Dases’ attorney, Salvatore Rico, of the Proskin law firm, that he should call the chief building inspector to see what would be needed to build in a floodplain. Rico said that the Dases will hire an engineer once the site is approved as a building lot.
"This is the first one we’re doing. We really discourage building in a floodplain," Weston said. "I can’t see approving it if it’s not a buildable site."